With the new guidelines for chat mods, and how chat mods were appointed before, I think we need to "refresh" the chat mods. People have been complaining about the chat, and recent events have caused me to think it could partly be the modmanship. Also, it's good to have everything under the guidelines, so I would think this would be for the best.

Also, on the matter of people complaining and "refreshing", I would like to bring up the option of shutting down the chat for a brief period, so as we can have time to appoint new mods and so everyone can take a break from chat. Lord of ShadowsWords mean nothing! 22:42, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to bring this up initially, but there were already so many people against making every mod subject to the new guidelines... I for one am for this. Not saying there are bad mods, but perhaps the replies left will do some good for what they can improve on personally as a mod. What way were you thinking to go about this? About shutting down the chat, only a few days would be necessary in my opinion. There's no reason to shut it down any longer than that.FoodFoodbandlt 23:04, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Well, maybe we can close the chat until we come to a consensus on 5 mods, besides Captain and MLW? We are also closing the chat for the refresh of mods as well, so we need time for that. Lord of ShadowsWords mean nothing! 23:16, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the last misunderstood consensus for Ozuzanna, I would say Ozuzanna should also keep mod rights, seeing as he pretty much went through the process. I would say that the chat can stay open until the ball is rolling on the mod refresh. Until then, there's no reason to shut it down.FoodFoodbandlt 23:31, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

See lower comments for change of opinion FoodFoodbandlt 19:18, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Weak oppose The more I look into this, the dumber it looks. I like the idea of this, but why mods are suggesting this is silly. If you want to refresh the moderation, you can shut down chat for an hour, but giving moderators "a break" is just silly. If moderators want to have a break, they can have one anyways. There is no moderation schedule. • Colgatecity • Talk • Contrib 23:13, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

It's not a break. It's a refresh. We need to purify the wiki chat of some things, and closing it is the best possible way to do it. Lord of ShadowsWords mean nothing! 23:16, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Support After looking at other points, I need to change my vote to a support. • Colgatecity • Talk • Contrib 23:24, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

:SupportI agree with this idea - with the new system of electing mods by democracy and all, it would be a good idea to start a fresh page of potential mods with the new system. As for shutting the chat, I think this would be a good idea too. Recently a lot of bans on the chat ban log have been socks, closing the chat for a while will give the admins and mods a break, the sock puppeteers may stop coming back.
Oz 23:15, September 2, 2012 (UTC)Changed opinion, see below'

Support I think this will help the chat a lot. It's good if we improve and try something new like this. However, there may be issues as well. The chat shutting down can anger some users. Still, I like what you think of. Professor Pickles (평화)"War has changed." 23:18, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Question, how would we pick the new chat moderators if the chat is shut down? would we base them off pre judged chat behavior or hat behavior in the irc? –Mylittlewut,Friendship is Questionable 23:20, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

More than likely on previous behavior, since many users won't be on IRC. If they do well on IRC though, this can be used for being a mod. Also, it will be on admin appointing or users nominating themselves. Lord of ShadowsWords mean nothing! 23:24, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

I dont agree with this well,most users love this chat,even though it has some probs,but i just dissagree,and it's not fair to bronies who just joined the wiki,they wont get to meet us.Pinkielover123 (talk) 23:27, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

New bronies have alternitives, there are otherwikias to chat on. We have talk pages and blogs to comment and discuss small issues or just talk. We also have an IRC. So basically it doesn't matter if we turn it off for awhile because we have alternatives. –Mylittlewut,Friendship is Questionable 00:19, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Support I suppose so, given that there's enough indication that the chat isn't gone for good and will be back. Otherwise I can see a lot of users asking on our talk pages where the chat's gone. --Kinrah (talk) 00:25, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Weak support Per Ozuzanna's statement. I am perfectly fine with chat being down for awhile. ﾚ∆ㄅ 18:08, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Strong oppose After discussion, I have changed my mind. I realize that demoting all the mods made under the old system would cause heavy bias and heavy anti-bias. People will vote for their friends and vote against their "enemies". Simple as that. I would also have to change my mind per Throwy's statement. ﾚ∆ㄅ 20:09, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Strongly oppose to the chat being shut down. What's going on in there? This forum exists so decisions can be made by simple voting. Someone got voted mod? Make them mod. Someone got voted not-mod? Make them not-mod. New emote got voted? Implement it. And so on and so on. I see no reason to "take time appointing new mods." –Throwawaytv 18:43, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

My main reason for support was for the mod revamp, but you're right. There really isn't a reason to shut it down. Set a date and make changes on that date. FoodFoodbandlt 19:13, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Well if people need to be demoded, including myself make a forum for demotions, or to have a general consensus about it, people like Panzer and Ember rarely go to chat, so I undertsand a review needs to be made, but demoding everyone and have them be voted again seems to be a bit drastic. Forcetalk 19:26, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Strongly oppose The idea seems to be very bad, if we want mods to be unmodded, then I have to refer to Oneforseven's case, were people that wanted him in or out voted on such matters, if mods should be voted on as a support or unmodded, then a forum on such votes should be made. Forcetalk 20:06, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose After seeing other people's opinions, I think that shutting down the chat is unnecessary, and only a few mods who are perhaps the most inactive should have a consensus instead of removing everyone else's mod rights first. Oz 20:15, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose After some discussion, i must say that, even as someone who helped support this idea in the beginning, i have changed my mental standing. True most of the voters on this page are biased (current mods say now, hopeful mods say yes), but other than that, it is just a bad idea. Shutting down chat is OK with me. A month to give people time to see what a privilege the chat truly is. A cleaning of the pipes would be nice, but a full sweep is no. This forum would be biased enough, but voting new mods would be EXTREME bias. Again, a month or two of shutdown is fine, as a sort of rehab. But NO on he full sweep. Perhaps just a bit of cleaning. Come over to the faded side! (talk) 20:21, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Strong oppose to the idea of mods appointed before the new policies were in place losing their mod rights, and having to be voted back in. However, if it were handled a little differently; say, they were put up for a vote to see whether they get to keep their mod rights instead; that way, if the results are inconclusive, they get to keep their mod rights, and if it's conclusive either way, well, then that won't be a problem. Also, as to the whole chat shutdown, I no longer go on chat, so I'm Neutral to that. -- This isJonny Manz, signingoff! 22:43, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Strong oppose Is this what it has come to? To perform an ethnic cleansing of all the mods? What good does it solve to take us out? Is this your crazy idea to fix our dysfunctional community, by taking out the peacekeepers? All this has done is leave me angry and full of questions.

Revising this, in theory it was a great idea, but in practice it would have been messy, I suggest that we have a forum and revise some mods or all mods, demode them if they are found to be AFK from chat for a long period of time or if they have broken rules, also a chat downtime seems like a good idea, it will make it be refreshed, as Fade said, it's better to clean the pipes rather than replacing them anew. Forcetalk 13:24, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Just how bad is the chat? Do people really want to shut it down? We can use #reddit-mylittlepony on irc.freenode.org if the chat is such a burden on everyone. —Throwawaytv 10:28, September 5, 2012 (UTC)

I think that this is a very good idea but as for the problem of where we go in the meantime has ab easy solution, we could simply assign another wiki or even create one for us to use untill the work here is complete.
Gavers101 17:59 September 6 2012

Support If the chat will come back and it's only temporary I think the admins and chat mods deserve a break. So I'm going to agree with it... as long as It comes back. :) Reedman 23:18, September 5, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose chat being turned off - It'd be sad to see it have to come to that, it's been up and running for over a year and we've made it through everything that was thrown at it. I remember hanging out in there in July last year just waiting for some people to join, it's come such a long way since then, there isn't a need to throw everything away, even if it's temporary. It'd be a real pity to end up just shutting it off.

Support re-evaluating current moderators, especially after some pretty incriminating stuff I was shown earlier today. Keyword is re-evaluate, not just demote them all, since that really wouldn't solve anything. By re-evaluate, we should just make a forum where we vote on each moderator who has not gone through the current system to keep their rights. (i.e. only Ozuzanna, Captain Derpy and Mylittlewut (recently given chatmod after being an admin anyway) will not require a vote) 20:38, September 6, 2012 (UTC)

When you say current system, do you mean an official forum vote? AppleJon-Talk 02:30, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose The refreshment of the chat mods is like making a new policy for Rollbackers and going "Let's refresh all the Rollbackers", I do agree with the fact that a Re-Evaluation would be better than just deleting all of the mods from the list, I'm not talking from the fact that I am a CM though I am talking from the point of time zones and the such. Rift Cyra .flow 06:10, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Reaching a consensus

So it started off with a bunch of support, then turned into opposes after some debate. What is the overall final consensus, or does more discussion need to be done? I personally like Call's way of reevaluating mods instead of demodding them. Lord of ShadowsWords mean nothing! 03:25, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Exactly; that's pretty much what I suggested up there too; with re-evaluation, if the votes are inconclusive, then they get to keep their mod rights, unlike with demodding, where they'd have to be voted back in. Needless to say, I'm for CoD's idea. -- This isJonny Manz, signingoff! 05:52, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

I strongly believe that a re-evaluation/re-confirmation whatever-you-want-to-call-it would be an excellent way to make sure our current moderators are still generally accepted by the community as being someone who has the responsibility to moderate the chat. It would be a forum, with each applicable moderator having his/her own section, and then support/oppose votes + discussion under each heading. I'd like to get that done as soon as possible, if possible. 13:04, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

As an addendum - I'm beginning to think we should just re-evaluate every mod, to keep things fair. 13:08, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

I personally think the idea of being able to re-evaluate our mods would be beneficial to both our administriation group and our chat group to both increase awareness of the proficiency of all of our mods, and the reaction our group has to them as individuals and a community. It would also help the community feel as if they have a role to play in this big bundle of things, instead of feeling like outsiders. This community belongs to everyone involved, and therefore, I think everyone should have a vote.

Closed - Merging opinions from the above subsection into this one. No one has raised any opposition to the re-evaluation idea and so it shall be taking place. The chat, however, will remain open. 18:42, September 8, 2012 (UTC)